Mr. Jimmy Z,
How does the Constitution of the United States have anything to do with being a Conservative or Liberal?

Do you just not want to learn about it? Would you rather play dumb or actually be dumb and not know or understand your Rights or how this country was founded, what your rights are, etc...

The Constitution of the United States protects everyone, it does not matter if you are Conservative or Liberal! The only thing that matters is if you are educated or are ignorant, and I guess that is your choice. When your rights get trampled on and you don't know it, and don't know how to protect yourself, I guess you will have to rely on someone else.

I also think you should do a little research on Hillsdale College, although it is considered one of the few conservative colleges it is mainly know for for being the first American college to prohibit in its charter all discrimination based on race, religion, or sex.. and for being one of the few colleges to not except any kind of government funding..

“Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” - James Madison

BTW, Jimmy Z, in addition to studying Austrian Economics, the Founding Fathers, and other conservative theory, I also spend an equal amount of time, maybe more, learning about Liberalism, Progressivism, Socialism, Anarcho-socialism, Communism, Marxism, and Stalinism. For every GOP meeting that I go to, I go to at least one Democrat meeting.

So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself. - Sun Tzu

Mr. Jimmy Z,
How does the Constitution of the United States have anything to do with being a Conservative or Liberal?

It's the interpretation by this right wing radical! The interpretation!

Quote:

Do you just not want to learn about it? Would you rather play dumb or actually be dumb and not know or understand your Rights or how this country was founded, what your rights are, etc...

I've learned about it my friend. I too am college educated.

Quote:

The Constitution of the United States protects everyone, it does not matter if you are Conservative or Liberal! The only thing that matters is if you are educated or are ignorant, and I guess that is your choice. When your rights get trampled on and you don't know it, and don't know how to protect yourself, I guess you will have to rely on someone else.

Scare tactics?

Quote:

BTW, Jimmy Z, in addition to studying Austrian Economics, the Founding Fathers, and other conservative theory, I also spend an equal amount of time, maybe more, learning about Liberalism, Progressivism, Socialism, Anarcho-socialism, Communism, Marxism, and Stalinism. For every GOP meeting that I go to, I go to at least one Democrat meeting.

If you're actually telling the truth then good for you. That is a lot more than most people can say.

Quote:

Care for a battle, or a debate? I'm game...

About what?
Don't you have like 100 companies to run? The national review has described Hillsdale as a "citadel for conservatism". I would be more interested in seeing him debate someone who interprets the constitution differently. I'm always interested in both sides of the story.

You took constitutional law in college? Not many students choose to take that class unless they are political science/government majors or thinking of law school. I took it but it was required for my major and is valuable in my career. But there were not any students outside my degree field in that class.

First, I don't see many free classes on the Constitution from a liberal point of view...

Scare tactics?

Telling the truth... I actually care about what is going on in this country and am trying to get others to do the same. Here is a free class that someone can take, if they take it and think the interpretation is wrong I promise you that the person will be able to raise such concerns to the professor. They then can go find another source and contrast the two. I care about the people in this country, and what we will all be going through. I am very concerned about the poor; and believe that it is much better to teach these people how to fish, versus giving them fish every day. I watch the movie Colors the other day. The movie was made in 1988. The poor black people in the movie said the very same things then that they are saying now. I know three generations of a poor black family who have lived in the same government housing project. Nothing has improved for them. Instead of the government providing for them, we should teach them how to provide for themselves. We should incentivise them to better themselves and their children, not have more kids.

History says that we are destined to be ruled by a dictator... and probably soon! I want people to become educated so that we can stop it from happening! Education is the key and history is the lock that it will open.

Paradoxically enough, the release of initiative and enterprise made possible by popular self-government ultimately generates disintegrating forces from within. Again and again after freedom has brought opportunity and some degree of plenty, the competent become selfish, luxury-loving and complacent, the incompetent and the unfortunate grow envious and covetous, and all three groups turn aside from the hard road of freedom to worship the Golden Calf of economic security. The historical cycle seems to be: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more.

At the stage between apathy and dependency, men always turn in fear to economic and political panaceas. New conditions, it is claimed, require new remedies. Under such circumstances, the competent citizen is certainly not a fool if he insists upon using the compass of history when forced to sail uncharted seas. Usually so-called new remedies are not new at all. Compulsory planned economy, for example, was tried by the Chinese some three milleniums ago, and by the Romans in the early centuries of the Christian era. It was applied in Germany, Italy and Russia long before the present war broke out. Yet it is being seriously advocated today as a solution of our economic problems in the United States. Its proponents confidently assert that government can successfully plan and control all major business activity in the nation, and still not interfere with our political freedom and our hard-won civil and religious liberties. The lessons of history all point in exactly the reverse direction. - Henning W. Prentis, Industrial Management in a Republic, p. 22

The first paragraph was written sometime in the 1700's and the second sometime in the 1940's. If these statements don't scare you then I guess you don't mind your kids living in bondage. It scares the hell out of me!

I'll debate you on anything; from the earth is round to the fact that Obama is a Marxist, debating and learning from it is my very nature.

I have two companies; a logging company and a real estate company. I also work as a litigation support appraiser. I work a lot, and travel a lot during the week and try to get home the weekends. Being in a new town every week with no one regular to share my time with gives me tons of time to read about all this stuff and to go to all the meetings... Most of my business is just coordinating people...

Palin - Based on their records she is the ONLY person who understands what Liberty is

No ego here either, I fully understand that I have plenty to learn and think that debate is a very good way to either become educated or educate others... it makes you think.

Mr. Anderson,
You have made similar comments, but don't seem even open minded enough to even have the conversation, let alone a debate.

I don't really give a crap what you think about Conservatism or Liberalism, or where on the scale you are, that is not my problem or concern. My problem or concern is the two paragraphs in italics in my previous post... what do you think about what they say? Are you at all concerned, why or why not?

Mr. Anderson,
You have made similar comments, but don't seem even open minded enough to even have the conversation, let alone a debate.

Yeah, that's exactly what my wife said when I poo poo'd her claim that the govt would be soon announcing that they've already had contact with aliens that visited us. Two people with the same complaint against me. Maybe there's something to it.

Yeah, that's exactly what my wife said when I poo poo'd her claim that the govt would be soon announcing that they've already had contact with aliens that visited us. Two people with the same complaint against me. Maybe there's something to it.

Mr. Anderson,
Do you know who Bernie Sanders is?

Everyone,
What are your thoughts on the paragraphs above in italics? Why?

Hey, when I see a free class I take it... I have taken that class, although probably another version of it, twice so far and have learned stuff each time. I also spend a lot of time talking to a crazy woman back east, without her I would be lost when it comes to the Constitution...

I was actually hoping that just one person from this site would take the free class, agree with their politics or not, they would probably learn something... Like I said before, education is the key and history is the lock that it will open.

"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." - Edmund Burke

Hillsdale! Oy. They went after me so hard when i was finishing high school. Evidently my grandfather wrote them a letter about how much I wanted to go there (had never heard of them).

I did hear about them a couple years later though, when President Roche (close buddy of GWB) was found out to be porking his son's wife for 19 years (both also staffers at the college) who shortly thereafter shot herself to death in the campus arboretum. Classy place.

Please let me know the next time JC teaches a free class on the Constitution, I'll take it. JC is the only perfect person I have ever heard of...

Please also let me know the next time any other college is offering free classes on the Constitution too, I'll take those too! Of course they will probably have some irrelevant item in their past, or in the past of a faculty member to judge them by..

Okay Dr. Anderson... I don't give a crap about "Global Warming", it is not my religion. Compare man's total output of "greenhouse" gases to that of just one active volcano.. why aren't we banning volcanoes? The idea that man can change the environment is just plain arrogant. Go work on a farm and see how Mother Nature cures herself...

And more importantly; WTF does "Global Warming" have to do with a free class on the Constitution of United States of America?

I have spent more time on farms - actually farming, more time in the woods - actually cutting and planting trees, more time restoring the environment - actually cleaning it up with my hands, more time learning about the environment - actually in a class room from someone with a PhD and in the field, more time reading about it - actually going to the library and reading scholarly publications, more time developing environmentally sound buildings, shopping centers, offices, etc... I have learned what I know through doing all these things, not from some propaganda from someone who wishes to control my life (Agenda 21), than you ever will - I also hold three LEED Certifications; LEED for New Construction, LEED for Retail (New Construction and Major Rehab), and LEED for Healtchare. Please get up to speed before our debate, also let me know exactly what we are debating - We will start a new thread... Please tell me about "over farming", its cause and its cures.

I have been to Prince William Sound and have seen how Mother Nature has healed herself just after 20 years. Not everything is not back to normal yet, but many people said the area would never return.

I have been to an eight hour lecture on Chernobyl with Sergey Gaschak, Anders Moller, and Tim Mousseau. After the accident people said that nothing would be able to live there for hundres of years, yet the area has turned into a wildlife refuge, where some species are actually thriving.

Man is but a spec in the history of the earth... I would love to hear Al Gore talk about the laws of Conservation of Mass or the Conservation of Energy. Of course we can change the weather, hell we can even make it rain if we want; the Chinese are doing this now. In the long run though, nature will run its course. Nothing lives forever.

Al Gore tells us all about how we should live and how we should implement Cap & Trade, how we should live with less, how we should pay more for energy, in short, how we should live. He on the other hand lives the high-life!

The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.

What about his houseboat, his jets? All examples of consumption and his hypocrisy.

Mr. Anderson,
If you don't think people want to control your life through environmental regulations then take a little time and actually read the United Nation's Agenda 21 publications. There are evil people in this world who think they are better qualified to make my life decisions than I am. They are trying to use environmental regulation to force me to do what they want. They want me to do what they say, while they sit on the hill and look down upon me. Private Property Rights are the cornerstone of Liberty. Not to mention the nut jobs who wish to give trees equal rights as man... Trees are a resource, a very good one, and completely renewable.

Uneducated Treehuggers were the direct cause of the disaster that was the Wallow Fire in northern Arizona. They sued in court every time a company contracted with the forest service to thin and manage the forest. As a result, the forest was thick and over grown with brush, the trees were crowded, immature, and stunted in growth. They went up like a match. On the reservations in the area where these Uneducated Treehuggers couldn't use the courts to implement their will the forest was healthy, the fires were easy to put out.

This all leads me back to the ORIGINAL INTENT of this thread! An uneducated man is a dangerous man. An uneducated man with a cause is even more so! Here we have a FREE class that you can take. Take it, and if you don't like it or disagree, challenge the professor or lecture. You doing so will probably improve the class, others probably have the same questions.

Mr. Anderson,
If you don't think people want to control your life through environmental regulations then take a little time and actually read the United Nation's Agenda 21 publications

Don't need to read it. I absolutely agree that the govt wants to control our lives though bloat and regulation. That's why I posted above that I would vote for some anarchy. There is nothing I would like better than seeing the govt stripped of a significant amount of power. However, just because the govt cannot create an agency to deal with a problem without the agency eventually turning into a bloated over-funded abuse of power doesn't mean that the problem doesn't exist.

I have spent more time on farms - actually farming, more time in the woods - actually cutting and planting trees, more time restoring the environment - actually cleaning it up with my hands, more time learning about the environment - actually in a class room from someone with a PhD and in the field, more time reading about it - actually going to the library and reading scholarly publications, more time developing environmentally sound buildings, shopping centers, offices, etc... I have learned what I know through doing all these things, not from some propaganda from someone who wishes to control my life (Agenda 21), than you ever will - I also hold three LEED Certifications; LEED for New Construction, LEED for Retail (New Construction and Major Rehab), and LEED for Healtchare. Please get up to speed before our debate, also let me know exactly what we are debating - We will start a new thread... Please tell me about "over farming", its cause and its cures.

I can't see how this can be true and yet you make the statement "The idea that man can change the environment is just plain arrogant. Go work on a farm and see how Mother Nature cures herself..."

Sure, that might be true over tens, hundreds or thousands of years but at what cost? Surely you have learned about the dust bowl during your studies, the dead zone in the gulf where the Mississippi empties, the Oklahoma Lead Contamination, Hooker Chemical, the Tennessee coal ash spill, the Bhopal disaster, and the countless of other superfund and environmental disaster sites. Mother nature cures itself over time (perhaps and in some situations) but what do you tell the real Mother who's kids have been killed by cancer directly linked to these environmental disasters? The truth of the matter is that most companies and entrepreneurs put their profits above all else.

And why is Al Gore always dragged into this? Who gives a flying F about Al Gore? We all know he's pushing a political agenda and making a killing. Who I listen to are the actual scientists who study this stuff, the subject matter experts.

I'm one for conservation, as opposed to environmentalism. Conservation being responsible use and environmentalism being zero use.

The truth of the matter is that most companies and entrepreneurs put their profits above all else.

I would argue that you have very little understanding of what the free market is suppose to be and what a company's primary objective is.

In a free market (one that is supported and based on the Constitution), the customers would decide how much profit a company can make. If the customer decided that a company was operating in a fashion that they disagreed with they could choose not to patronize that company. They could also choose to publicize what they think the company is doing wrong. If enough people had the same thoughts and concerns then the company would lose money and be compelled to change their ways.

As far as a mother's kid being killed by cancer directly related to a man made environmental disaster, of course this a bad thing. The mother does have legal recourse as provided by the Constitution. The person or company responsible has the duty not impede on another's rights.

I think you should take the FREE class on the Constitution.

I am able to rent my retail space at a premium because of the fact that they are "green" and are all rated at minimum LEED Gold. I even get the premium when competing centers across the street have large vacancies. My tenants all are environmentally conscious and generally want a place of business that also promotes their views. This is the free market and is basis of my retail space business.

Again, I think you should take the FREE class. You might learn something that you can use to further your agenda...

Okay Dr. Anderson... I don't give a crap about "Global Warming", it is not my religion.

Not my religion either. BTW, I did look into it and it does appear that the magnetic field of the solar wind does have an effect in incoming cosmic rays.

I disagree with the assertion that man cannot change the weather with pollutants. However, I also don't believe the US has the ability to do much about it as long as other emerging economies pollute the environment. It's all or nothing. And yes, there are natural causes we can't do much about.

Even though I don't have the same philosophy as you, I've come to he conclusion that a good shakeup of govt is what we need. So I'm willing to vote for a little anarchy of the tea party kind given the right candidate. Then when people go... "well you got what you deserved", I can go... "no, I got what I voted for. I deserved better, but nobody in govt could do an honest day's work."

Just signed up for the class thanks for the heads up. Information is the best tool to have in life. A free coarse on something like The Constitution is unheard of. I listen to conservative talk radio and Air America and NPR when I can find it . I have a hard time understanding the liberal point of view . Seams like they are always telling people how to live but not applying the same standards to themselves.

I think Sam Ingram has stated my beliefs quite nicely using Liberal Al Gore as an example. Can you name a liberal that actually practices what he preaches. How is it that we are suppose to sacrifice and conserve at the same time Barack and Michell have to take two privet jets within 3 hours to the same destination. What about Police and her many travels? You dont see a double standard? There is an old saying that goes. When you are in your 20s if you dont think like a liberal you have no heart When you are in your 40s if you dont think like a conservative you have no brain.

Compare man's total output of "greenhouse" gases to that of just one active volcano.. why aren't we banning volcanoes?

First, it is not my seminar...

Second, while your post will lead to my further investigation on the subject (I do appreciate it), I did not state, nor was it my assumption that one volcano emits more CO2 than mankind. I was trying to point out that an active volcano produces a significant amount of CO2. I see very little discussion regarding the net effect of CO2 on our environment, just that it is bad. Many of the Al Gore type propaganda type articles that I read simply state that CO2 is bad and that we can somehow regulate it. What would happen if we were able to eliminate all CO2? What role does CO2 play in other systems besides "global warming"? Does an increased level of CO2 promote plant life? Does an increased level of CO2 actually have an affect on "global warming"? Throughout history, have major volcanic eruptions had a discernible net effect on CO2 levels?

"The idea that man can change the environment is just plain arrogant."

Sam, are you serious??? You honestly believe that dumping toxic waste into a stream does not affect the environment? What about the big smog cloud that covers LA? When was the Exxon Valdez spill, is that area back to the same state before the spill?

I have spent more time on farms - actually farming, more time in the woods - actually cutting and planting trees, more time restoring the environment - actually cleaning it up with my hands, more time learning about the environment - actually in a class room from someone with a PhD and in the field, more time reading about it - actually going to the library and reading scholarly publications, more time developing environmentally sound buildings, shopping centers, offices, etc... I have learned what I know through doing all these things, not from some propaganda from someone who wishes to control my life (Agenda 21), than you ever will

I don't know you at all, but the name Cliff Claven comes to mind, your posts are just priceless.

Like conservative Michelle Bachmann railing against the stimulus, but being the first in line to hold out her hand for federal money. For the most part ALL politicians are hypocrites to some degree, it's not a right left thing.

I think you mean a spokesman espousing a liberal cause, not a liberal. Is there even a politician that practices what he preaches? How do you even know if Al Gore is a liberal? Maybe he's just another a*hole trying to capitalize on an opportunity.

Also your quote looks a bit silly in the context of saying that saving the environment from pollution is a liberal cause. I would like to think that I could be a conservative and still protect the environment. But apparently some people think that's not possible.

Michael, So when you say "conservative", do you mean one that blows through all of our natural resources and pollutes the planet, isn't that an oxymoron??

"I have been to Prince William Sound and have seen how Mother Nature has healed herself just after 20 years. Not everything is not back to normal yet, but many people said the area would never return."

If it is not back to "normal yet", how can you say to the people that said "the area would never return" are/were wrong? I don't understand the mentality that we should trash the only inhabitable planet in our solar system because "Mother Nature" will eventually heal herself. It's a disturbing mantra in which to live.

If it is not back to "normal yet", how can you say to the people that said "the area would never return" are/were wrong? I don't understand the mentality that we should trash the only inhabitable planet in our solar system because "Mother Nature" will eventually heal herself. It's a disturbing mantra in which to live.

I will say that most people who are against drilling domestically for oil aren't against trashing the planet. They are against trashing their own part of the planet. They still need oil and are for not only trashing someone else's part of the planet, but they are also for supporting some dictator who profits off the resources and couldn't care less about the people who live with the results.

I practice and use "green" ideals because they can be profitable. I rent lots of "green "space to companies who maintain ecology friendly business missions. Several of my projects are fully leased and have competing projects across the street that have high vacancy, especially in the upper northwest.

Salmon and otters are present in record numbers in Prince William Sound, more than ever before. The natives are actually being allowed to hunt otters again. An entire new ecosystem has emerged as a result of the oil eating microbes that were released, they are the new bottom of a new food chain.

Have you ever hunted Caribou in Alaska? If you have you would know that the Alaska Pipeline is the place to find them. In 1977, as the Prudhoe region started delivering oil to America's southern 48 states, the Central Arctic caribou herd numbered 6,000; it has since grown to 27,128. Many, many people said that the pipeline would force the caribou to the way of the buffalo...

I don't have any mantra's, only common sense, rational thought, and objectivity.

Jeremy
One meaning of conservatism is to use the natural resources responsibly . Stopping all drilling ,logging, nuke plants,refineries etc in favor of solar and wind is insane .You dont have to shut down industry to be green. Compared to the 50s cars , trucks, planes, air, water and ground are much cleaner. We can use our resources with out polluting the planet . No doubt there will be far less pollution produced here than in some 3rd world country with no pollution standards.

Sam,
One other note, I doubt your as smart as you think you are. If you were, you would not come to wakeworld to debate people. Have you actually ever tried to debate the very people you tend to disregard? In this instance, that would be natural scientists. How about we take a gander over to http://www.thescienceforum.com and debate global warming or if humans can change the environment?

Jimmy,
You have made a HUGE mistake! You have assumed that I think I am smart.

I do not, that is why I am continually taking classes, debating, and trying to learn. In my discussion with people here on Wakeworld I often learn things which cause me to either further analyse my position or change it entirely. Many of my discussions with both John Anderson and Jeremy have caused me to further consider my positions, and I have learned from both.

I am on wakeworld because I find it interesting, can relate to the other users, and genuinely enjoy wakeboarding.

I don't disregard anyone, that too is your assumption. Also, I fully believe that humans can change their environment, I just believe that human activity has only a nominal affect, if any, on global warming. All the laws in the world will have only a nominal affect, if any, on the overall change in climate on planet earth. Other factors impact the change in climate to such a larger degree that anything I do, or We do, is nominal and futile in the long term when it comes to a change in climate on earth. Furthermore any change in my day-to-day life must be evaluated on a cost-benefit basis. In my opinion the cost of many of the proposed changes in my day-to-day life in the name of stopping climate change are preposterous. The costs would far out weight the benefits.

By taking the classes that I take, I look for input from natural scientists, and the opportunity to challenge their positions in class, and learn from them. I find it funny that you are guilty of the very thing that you accuse me of and then challenge me on. You refuse to take a FREE class from someone because you don't support their viewpoint. Instead of listening to them, challenging them, and then basing your opinions on what was discussed you just say, I'll pass. Are you afraid you will learn something?

I think you should take the FREE class on the Constitution.

I will go discuss or debate global warming on your forum if you go take the FREE class on the Constitution... I assume, and hope that we would both learn something.

Jimmy,
You have made a HUGE mistake! You have assumed that I think I am smart.

I do not, that is why I am continually taking classes, debating, and trying to learn. In my discussion with people here on Wakeworld I often learn things which cause me to either further analyse my position or change it entirely. Many of my discussions with both John Anderson and Jeremy have caused me to further consider my positions, and I have learned from both.

I am on wakeworld because I find it interesting, can relate to the other users, and genuinely enjoy wakeboarding.

I don't disregard anyone, that too is your assumption. Also, I fully believe that humans can change their environment, I just believe that human activity has only a nominal affect, if any, on global warming. All the laws in the world will have only a nominal affect, if any, on the overall change in climate on planet earth. Other factors impact the change in climate to such a larger degree that anything I do, or We do, is nominal and futile in the long term when it comes to a change in climate on earth. Furthermore any change in my day-to-day life must be evaluated on a cost-benefit basis. In my opinion the cost of many of the proposed changes in my day-to-day life in the name of stopping climate change are preposterous. The costs would far out weight the benefits.

By taking the classes that I take, I look for input from natural scientists, and the opportunity to challenge their positions in class, and learn from them. I find it funny that you are guilty of the very thing that you accuse me of and then challenge me on. You refuse to take a FREE class from someone because you don't support their viewpoint. Instead of listening to them, challenging them, and then basing your opinions on what was discussed you just say, I'll pass. Are you afraid you will learn something?

I think you should take the FREE class on the Constitution.

I will go discuss or debate global warming on your forum if you go take the FREE class on the Constitution... I assume, and hope that we would both learn something.

That sounds reasonable Sam but I'm not sure. This class really sounds like it's going to be pushing the Tea Bagger agenda. I'm going to try and do a little bit more research on this course. I'm not ruling it out though!

John,
We don't have, and have never had a free market here in the USA. It was bastardized in the very beginning to pick winners and losers. I fully understand this, the difference between what currently exists and what in my opinion is the direction that we should take. I also understand how I have been able to use free market principles in my real estate business and how it has affected my business. The ideals that I discussed have directly impacted and benefited me and my business. My tenants choose to lease space in my centers because they value my product over the competition.

I have no aversion to taking the course, if I can find the time. I realize that we don't have a free market. And I am very much for a free market. Not because I think that anything goes and a free market will always steer itself towards the ideal solution. But because I think govt is incompetent in it's ability to stop exceeding it's intended purpose once you set it in motion.

I also believe that the free market can steer itself towards unintended consequences if left unchecked. But right now I think the problem is that the wealth of the market has bought the govt and it's time for a reboot.

There's always the wiki for those who don't have time or just don't feel like taking a class on the constitution due to the teacher in this case or for other reasons or who are busy taking classes/reading up on other subjects:

"Compare man's total output of "greenhouse" gases to that of just one active volcano.. why aren't we banning volcanoes?"

Where did you get the info that said one volcano emits more CO2 than "man's total output"? Did you make that up, because it is a blatant lie and does little for your credibility. If you continue to spout bad information, people will avoid your seminars as opposed to flocking to them.

This is direct from the US Geological Survey:

"Do the Earth’s volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities? Research findings indicate that the answer to this frequently asked question is a clear and unequivocal, “No.” Human activities, responsible for a projected 35 billion metric tons (gigatons) of CO2 emissions in 2010 (Friedlingstein et al., 2010), release an amount of CO2 that dwarfs the annual CO2 emissions of all the world’s degassing subaerial and submarine volcanoes (Gerlach, 2011).

The published estimates of the global CO2 emission rate for all degassing subaerial (on land) and submarine volcanoes lie in a range from 0.13 gigaton to 0.44 gigaton per year (Gerlach, 1991; Varekamp et al., 1992; Allard, 1992; Sano and Williams, 1996; Marty and Tolstikhin, 1998). The preferred global estimates of the authors of these studies range from about 0.15 to 0.26 gigaton per year. The 35-gigaton projected anthropogenic CO2 emission for 2010 is about 80 to 270 times larger than the respective maximum and minimum annual global volcanic CO2 emission estimates. It is 135 times larger than the highest preferred global volcanic CO2 estimate of 0.26 gigaton per year (Marty and Tolstikhin, 1998)."